Gwinnett’s Board of Commissioners Chair Charlotte Nash, left, announces the approval of a new contract with MARTA on Wednesday, August 1 at the Gwinnett Justice and Administration Center auditorium. Commissioner Tommy Hunter, District 3, is right. JENNA EASON / JENNA.EASON@COXINC.COM

Hunter filed a lawsuit challenging his reprimand, arguing that the ethics board was unconstitutional because some of its members were appointed by private entities, not public officials with the proper delegation powers.

After more than a year of legal wrangling, the original apeal filed by Hunter attorney Dwight Thomas was dismissed last month on what, essentially, amounted to a technicality.

A subsequent ruling paved the way for the new notice of appeal that Thomas filed last week.

In that case, former DeKalb Commissioner Sharon Barnes Sutton had argued that the county’s ethics board was illegal because it gave outside groups like the local bar association and chamber of commerce the power to appoint members.

Gwinnett uses a similar system for several of its appointments, though county officials have argued that their ethics board is different — and not effected by the ruling — because it is merely a recommending body. Gwinnett’s Board of Commissioners makes the ultimate decision about whether or not to discipline the subject of an ethics complaint, and may choose to ignore the ethics board’s recommendations altogether.

Whether or not the Supreme Court sees a legal difference between the two may very likely determine the outcome of Hunter’s case.

A potential time frame for Hunter’s case to be docketed in the state’s highest court was not immediately clear, though it could be at least 45 days. Thomas asked for that much time to have a transcript from a previous hearing in the case produced.

The state Supreme Court ruled that any board that wields power cannot have appointees placed there by groups or people who are not accountable to the public.